THE DEVELOPMENTAL NATURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS TRANFORMATION
Adam Blatner, M.D.
Posted December 27, 2010: From an article published in 2004 in Re-Vision:
A
Journal of Consciousness
and Transformation, (Vol. 26 (4), 2-7)..
Although the journal I
published this article in (in 2004) deals with consciousness and
transformaton, I don't see these as two separate categories; rather, I
suggest that it is in the nature of consciousness to expand and
undergo a qualitative change, a consciousness
transformation. The thesis of this paper is that rather than viewing
consciousness transformation as a single dramatic event, it is better
to recognize it as a gradual process in which hundreds of smaller
transformations generate a new infrastructure. At certain points in its
development, this system then can express emergent properties beyond
those of its component elements.
Development and Change
Transformation involves new learning, especially the kind of learning
in which the learner goes beyond merely acquiring new information. Jean
Piaget, a cognitive psychologist who worked and published mainly
between the late 1920s and the 1950s, noted that learning involves two
types of processes, assimilation and accommodation (Piaget 1951).
Although his work was mainly on children, this idea also applies to
adults. Piaget described a model of learning in which the
mind is viewed as a multi-modal map, called a “schema,” which involves
not only thoughts but also a felt sense of what the world was
about. Learning involves an interplay between experiences that
add further information to a person’s inner map by assimilation and
other experiences that require that the individual expand or modify
that map through accommodation. Assimilative learning is the most
familiar type of learning because it dominates our present educational
system. It involves mainly memorization and skills acquisition but is
the type that is most readily forgotten.
Accommodative learning is also familiar
because it occurs naturally when a child learns to walk, control one’s
bowels, ride a bicycle, or swim. This type of learning creates an
experience that is impossible to forget. It even becomes difficult to
remember what it was like before one knew how to do these things
because it involves a subtle change in how the self is experienced.
However subtle these changes, such accommodative processes should be
recognized as being transformative. Certain more passive but dramatic
accommodative experiences are also transformative, such as trauma,
near-death experiences, or being deeply loved, because they change the
way one feels about self and the world.
Puberty is a major example of accommodation
and developmental transformation. Before puberty, members of the
opposite sex are regarded as vaguely exotic and at times irrelevant.
However, with the help of hormones and sociocultural patterning, they
become objects of attraction, which creates sexual excitation and
forges new relationships. During puberty, development becomes
increasingly complex
as multiple lines of learning are integrated into one’s concept of
self. For example, interest in the opposite sex becomes more than a
matter of fantasy and excitation; it quickly becomes a process
requiring grooming, communications skills, a relinquishment of childish
egocentricity, follow-through, and later the additional complexity of
commitment. Similarly, other types of personal development, such as
work, spirituality, or general socialization, also involve the
integration of increasing numbers of roles. However, some of these
lines of development may fail to synchronize with the others, so that
although a person may appear to be fully mature, certain roles remain
in a rather primitive state, resulting in immature modes of thinking
and feeling. Emotional maladjustments and character pathology may be
usefully viewed as being the product of such underdeveloped dimensions
of the personality.
Infrastructure
While a single or small number of dramatic incidents
can occasionally trigger consciousness transformation, the challenge
remains of integrating these learning experiences. This generally
requires the concurrent support of a significant number of adjunctive
conditions or changes which, in their aggregate, constitute an
infrastructure of accommodative events. As an analogy, in the political
and economic
arenas, significant development requires the construction of an
infrastructure consisting of resources, people with required skills,
adequate supporting institutions, corrective procedures, laws,
education, and motivation, among other factors. In the development of
the individual, similar types of skills, situations and support are
needed. Without them, new learnings and changes are neutralized. This
effect is one of the main discoveries of the application of systems
theory in family therapy. Working on one person in a family can be
ineffective because other family
members draw that person back into the family’s established
relationship patterns.
Applied to the understanding of consciousness
transformation, this idea of infrastructure explains why various
writers and teachers note that individuals need to be established at
one level before they can effectively advance to the next. For example,
in the system of Kundalini Yoga, the increasingly higher levels of
consciousness are identified as the various ”chakras” and associated
with different locations along the spinal column. Ken Wilber (2000)
charted out several development maps and subsequently noted that a
variety of domains of life involvement must be coordinated and balanced
to be established. In addition, drawing on the then largely unpublished
papers on “spiral dynamics” by Clare Graves, Don Beck, and Christopher
Cowan, Wilber noted that individuals are also caught up in the
evolution of the collectives in which they are embedded (Wilber (2001).
Like the work of Erik Erikson (1963), this approach stresses the
importance of social interactions in reinforcing personal developmental
transformations.
Much of the research and writing on adult
development, though, generally has addressed what the majority of
moderately educated people in America in the late twentieth century
have already experienced. However, there is a lack of studies on people
who have reached significant levels of compassion, creativity, wisdom,
spontaneity, spirituality, and the like. Each of these dimensions have
been briefly addressed in some more recent books, but future research
should address in greater detail the heightened capacity for
self-reflectiveness, also known as meta-cognition.
Meta-Cognition
The Greek word root meta means beyond. Applied to
the thinking process, meta-cognition refers less to thinking about what
one is doing or experiencing and more to paying attention to the ways
one is thinking: the biases, emotional pulls, patterns of avoidance and
desire, reasoning, and especially the relative effectiveness of one’s
own mental processes. The philosopher Herbert Fingarette (2000) drew
attention to the distinction between consciousness as a general
awareness--the state of most people--and an explicit awareness--a focus
on the thinking process itself, or an awareness of being aware. In this
sense, meta-cognition includes not only a sharper awareness of the
thought process but also a curiosity about the many ways one’s thoughts
happen. This curiosity develops skills for noticing the way one
sometimes justifies an idea, lapses into more childish types of
reasoning, or is tempted by the “deadly sins” of envy, spite, anger,
pride, or lust. But it also nudges intuition, aspirations, and the call
to a “higher self.” Meta-cognition involves working with these many
currents of the mind, to learn to manage one’s own thinking more
consciously and effectively. Although Piaget only vaguely hinted at
this idea,
the more sophisticated models of meta-cognition seem to belong only to
the rare intellectual elite. However, we are living in an era in which
the promise of meta-cognition for everyone is more achievable, through
a number of cultural developments.
A good model for understanding the emergence of
meta-cognition involves the recognition that the mind operates
simultaneously on different levels: on the level of the various roles
one plays, and another, “meta” level where the mind coordinates and
modulates the ways those roles are played (Blatner, 2000, 151). For
example, a man may be engaged in the role of father coaching his son in
baseball. In addition to paying attention to the details of his son’s
performance and the complexities of the game, this man is more or less
consciously modulating the intensity, rate, and wording of his coaching
statements. Some fathers lacking meta-cognition simply react,
unconsciously blending what they previously have had modeled for them
as children, their positive or negative reactions to this, and other
innate behaviors. But others might pause to consider that those
attitudes and approaches may not work with their boy. This
self-reflection is an example of meta-cognition.
The roots of meta-cognition lie in the emergence of
a self-reflective capacity or meta-role. This emergence occurs as a
toddler begins to learn about the psychosocial phenomenon called “play”
At first, a toddler just messes around and tries different things.
Piaget called this stage sensori-motor play. But then the process
becomes more socially interactive. The awareness of an audience and the
concepts of imagination, deception, and teasing develop. The
exploration of the possibilities of
paradox, surprise, and pretense lays the foundation for the element of
humor. Exploration also opens the door to the next step, role playing.
A young child knows that he or she is not really the person--such as a
“daddy,” “fireman,” or “superhero”--he or she is pretending to be and
understands that the transformation is make believe. Part of the fun
also is that so much of this social context of playfulness can be
established just with a look or a change of voice pitch or rhythm,
without extensive explanation (Blatner & Blatner, 1997).
Although this type of role playing is not yet
meta-cognition, it is the birth of the meta-role, which coordinates and
modulates the way the various roles are played. A slight progression
toward meta-cognition occurs as the young child learns to comment on
the flow of the action, such as by saying, “Time out. I have to go to
the bathroom,” “Wait a minute, you’re playing too rough,” or “Let’s do
that over.” Such sentences are understood as being separate from the
roles being played. These are the beginnings of the ideas of rehearsal
and improvisation (Blatner 2000, 119). (More on the meta-role function
(as "choosing self") on a related webpage.)
This role playing eventually evolves into real life
roles, such as knowing how a child respectful of parents behaves, being
quiet in church, speaking softly when asking for help in going to the
bathroom, excreting in the toilet rather than in the pants. During
play, while the child pretends to be a firefighter or a doctor or has
make-believe superhero adventures, he or she is further learning about
the ordinary range of social roles. These roles, especially certain
roles as “good guys” or “bad guys,” are replete with sets of
expectations, attitudes, status, and modes of behavior.
Moreover, the child also acquires to
various degrees a range of meta-cognitive skills that help the child
learn some self-discipline about which roles are played when. This
learning of skills and information as they apply to various rules is
what dominates normal education, and also most sports. Although young
people are taught to learn to think more critically and develop better
reasoning skills--which are slightly metacognitive--education generally
remains focused on the information being thought about. The learning of
meta-role skills is seldom explicitly taught and is assumed to be
implicitly learned.
Metacognition should not be confused with
patterns of self-doubt or self-consciousness, which can be automatic
patterns of disqualification of one’s own perceptions and ideas. Many
families instill these qualities through pathogenic patterns, such as
hyper-criticalness and shaming. In addition, some children are more
temperamentally inclined to doubt their own sense of reality. But
self-doubt and self-consciousness are not meta-cognition. In fact,
active exercises of meta-cognition, such as psychotherapy or a
disciplined self-help program, are needed to correct these habits.
In terms of dynamic psychology, the meta-role is
part of what Freud called the ego, and Eric Berne called the “Adult Ego
State” (Berne 1961). However, in talking about roles as a derivative of
the dramaturgical model in social psychology, the base metaphor of
which is “all the world’s a stage,” the meta-role can be best compared
to an inner director and playwright. Those skilled in meta-cognition
are not
confined only to conventional modes of rational thought. They realize
that cultivating emotional sensitivity, empathy, body-awareness,
imagination, inspiration, improvisation, and intuition are as important
as ordinary thinking. These two levels of thought address different
domains. The ordinary roles each person plays focus on the
circumstances associated with various relationships and situations. One
thinks about the issues at work, the challenges of raising children,
how to prepare dinner. The meta-role, in contrast, considers which
roles to play when and determines how well those roles are being
played. The ordinary role repertoire includes
not only social roles, such as parent, friend, cousin, club member,
political party member, worker, and the like, but also fantasy roles.
To varying degrees, everyone identifies with sports heroes or movie or
television characters. These imagined roles thicken life experiences
considerably. Even the ways a person eats, sleeps, excretes, carries or
moves his or her body, communicates nonverbally, and changes voice tone
are socially conditioned. If that same person were raised in a
different culture, these basic body functions would be experienced and
conducted differently. Much of the texture and value in life comes
through the way an individual interprets and exaggerates various modes
of role playing.
The meta-cognitive functions, though, are a
bit different. They focus on the mind’s relative effectiveness in
various skill areas, such as observing, investigating, interrogating,
exploring, rationally thinking, imagining, intuiting, deciding,
choosing, modulating, improvising, balancing, distinguishing, letting
go, persevering, playing, synthesizing, and creating. Beyond these
skills, meta-cognitive functions
include the awareness of the use of these different operations and a
determination of which meta-cognitive skill is relevant to the
situation at hand. The habitual exercise of any one of these
skills or group of them is not in itself meta-cognition. In fact, most
personality disorders might be thought of as fixating on only some
skills in this repertoire. Ideally, the self-reflective person is open
to an ever broader repertoire of skills and becomes wiser about how to
use which skill at the appropriate time. For example, a more
self-reflective person would be aware of the times when it is
inappropriate to be a clown and other times when it would be useful to
be playful or even silly. Similarly, even a person who is not
characterized as a prima donna recognizes when a more dramatic form of
self-assertion might be just what is needed. Conscious role flexibility
is the key. The value of the concept of metacognition and the
point of this article is that a transformation from ordinary awareness
to a more self-reflective type of consciousness is possible.
Cultural Supports for Meta-Cognition
One precursor for modern developments was the
meaning of science, not only in its implications for our being able to
know and thus affect the objective world, but also for its implications
for the nature of consciousness itself. Science is in its essence a
meta-cognitive step, for it invites us to question our own thinking. It
recognizes the realities of illusion and self-deception. Around the
same time as the development of science
in seventeenth-century Europe, there was a resurgence of questioning
one’s own thinking. The philosophical field of “epistemology” (which
asks how we know what we know) emerged vigorously from the surrounding
sea of dogma, tradition, and willed belief. Socrates’ dictum “know
thyself” supported this wave of thought because on the surface it seems
that we do know ourselves, but on closer inspection, the opposite is
closer to the truth. Following this tradition, the introspective
philosophers of the seventeenth century began to exercise their skills
of self-reflection.
In the context of psychoanalysis, however, the art
of introspection became more systematic around the beginning of the
twentieth century. Over the next few decades, a more skeptical attitude
emerged regarding the pervasiveness of self-deception, along with a
more careful cataloging of the various ways this occurred. During the
1940s, a variety of other approaches were added to psychoanalysis, and
by the late 1970s there were more than a hundred of them. All of these
forms of psychotherapy had the implicit cultivation of the skills of
meta-cognition or self-reflection as a common denominator. The term
psychological mindedness, as it referred to patients who seemed
interested in the process of probing their own mental functioning, was
another term that became prevalent in the mental health fields.
In addition to the proliferation of
psychotherapists and different types of counseling, a parallel process
of popularization of psychology has occurred in our culture. The stigma
of psychotherapy and personal reflection is lessening, and more people
are buying self-help books, reading introspective articles in
magazines, and watching psychologically oriented television talk shows.
Although at the time of this writing, the majority of people seem to
find self-reflective and psychological talk somewhat threatening, a
greater sense of
psychological-mindedness is approaching the norm. From the 1960s
through the 1970s, the human
potential movement expressed an extension of psychotherapy, which
applied methods to help healthy people become even healthier.
Originating in efforts to reduce racial tensions and promote leadership
skills (via the “T-Group” in the late 1940s), group methods that
examined communications styles and attitudes proved helpful enough to
be incorporated in the sensitivity training of managers and leaders in
various industries during the 1950s. In the 1960s, these methods merged
with new theories of humanistic and existential psychology and became
known as the encounter group. These methods continued to be refined and
focused into a wide range of personal growth programs, with various
workshops being presented at progressive learning centers such as
Esalen or Omega Institutes. Since that time, although encounter
groups have all but disappeared, more focused forms of psychological
development have proliferated in the forms of coaching, consulting,
religious retreats, and programs for prisoners, among others.
The development of self-management
skills has become a significant part of management training in general,
and the related fields of organizational and human resources
development are shifting away from the old-style, temperamental bosses
toward a new generation of managers who recognize that fostering
creativity and teamwork among workers requires a more sophisticated
skill set (Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee 2002). A similar development is
happening in
schools, where it is becoming increasingly commonplace to find programs
that address bullying, anger management, sexual harassment, drug abuse,
peer pressure, and premature sexuality (Cohen 1999). The general idea
of social and emotional learning is a growing trend, and it promises a
continuation of the move toward meta-cognition in society.
Another cultural development that promotes
meta-cognition has been the “consciousness raising groups” that were
popular in the early 1970s. These groups included mostly women seeking
to understand the cultural shifts associated with feminism--that the
personal is political. This explicit awareness of misleading attitudes
and modes of thought became a part of a wide range of civil rights
efforts. The discourse on oppression--the idea that both oppressors and
those oppressed share a common complex of beliefs--has been a related
meta-cognitive tool. Such thinking also broadens the circle of caring
so that individuals can question the way many people and groups or
classes of people have been marginalized.
Another trend toward increasing
psychological-mindedness is seen in the increasing use of support
groups, beginning with an expansion of the twelve step programs for
alcoholism to apply also to other types of addictions, such as drugs,
food, debt, gambling, and sex. Family members also gave each other
support in groups, as “co-dependents” or “adult children of alcoholics”
(ACOA). This type of support expanded to become groups for those
grieving or anticipating the loss of a loved one, cancer survivors, and
victims of life-threatening diseases.
Meta-cognition has also been supported by the
emergence of a variety of spiritual endeavors and religious traditions
that attend more to introspection than dogma. Within Christianity,
there has been the emergence of New Thought and Religious Science--a
conglomeration of sub-groups or denominations that are relatively light
on dogma and focus instead on underlying attitudes. Buddhism–especially
Zen and the Southeast Asian approach called Vipassana, or
“mindfulness,” meditation–also draws attention explicitly to the ways
the mind operates. From Hinduism, the more refined forms of yoga
similarly attend to the complexities of mind and how they foster
illusion. In turn, these approaches have influenced psychology and,
more specifically, an important outgrowth of humanistic psychology
called transpersonal psychology. (The people associated with this field
have been among the main contributors to ReVision.)
Meanwhile, developments in fields related to
the behavioral sciences continue to bring attention to the nature of
thinking. Linguistics, semantics, semiotics, communications studies,
anthropology, comparative mythology, comparative religion, history,
cultural studies, literature, poetry, esoteric and occult studies,
neuroscience, parapsychology, and a host of other developments all
offer new tools for thinking about the ways we think, imagine, and
feel. Along with these, the general cultural ferment of
the postmodern condition, with its accelerating rate of change,
multicultural mixing, mobility, communications, computers, and the
Internet, and rising expectations and demands, combine to throw
conventional habits of thinking, attitudes, social role definitions,
and established relations into question. Society needs to become more
explicitly aware of biases, avoidances, stereotypes,
overgeneralizations, to develop creative responses to the ways
individuals think and feel about problems. Tendencies to rely on
habitual modes of thought are themselves becoming the problem.
Implications
The identification of these concepts can in itself
serve as a tool for transforming consciousness: “Finding a name for
something is a way of conjuring its existence, of making it possible
for people to see a pattern where they didn’t see anything before”
(Rheingold, 1988, 3). Therefore, meta-cognition and the intentional
exercise of the various component skills of the meta-role, can become
significantly more effective when done with explicit awareness.
In conventional psychotherapy or personal
growth programs, people learn to exercise their various meta-cognitive
skills, including self-observation, decision making, and internal
conflict resolution. By recognizing how all these are forms of
self-management, people can identify with the meta-role. For example,
the role of the chief executive officer of a company is increasingly
highlighted in modern culture in light of the news and expansion of
multi-national corporations. It is a glamorous role–and one capable of
profound corruption. Nevertheless, it is often a useful metaphor to
suggest that like the many divisions and departments in a business or
industry, each individual is a complex of many roles (Blatner, 2003).
Effectively coordinating one’s many parts in the complexities of a
changing world is a highly skilled job, one worthy of great
remuneration. However, sometimes the
metaphor of the artist or the inner playwright and director can be more
effective, because in meta-cognition, one has to manage and direct the
many roles they play.
Summary
Consciousness transformation may
be better appreciated as a complex structure of many converging lines
of development, each building on the other. Similarly, cultural
developments converge and progress. Marshall McLuhan, a pioneer in
media studies who coined the phrase “the medium is the message,” said,
"The hybrid or meeting of
two media is a moment of truth and revelation from which new form is
born . . . a moment of freedom and release from the ordinary trance and
numbness imposed by [the separate media] on our senses. . . . The
crossings of media release great force.” (1965, 55) Applied
to meta-cognition, many trends bring
forth a more explicit awareness of the nature of consciousness itself,
along with a concern for more intentionally coordinating and balancing
its many functions. There are numerous
approaches to fostering this more conscious exercise of the way we go
about being conscious in our culture. The more we play with our roles,
the more we become explicitly consciously aware that we are playing and
that we can learn to play more effectively, interestingly, and
cooperatively.
Just as cognition has expanded from
thinking about the world to thinking about thinking, so has evolution
expanded as a concept. Originally describing a strictly biological
phenomenon, evolution has emerged to become a major principle in
considering history, spirituality, philosophy, and consciousness
itself. New possibilities for a qualitatively different, more
reflective, and more wisely intentional mode of consciousness are
emerging, creating a world in which meta-cognition is taught as a group
of skills and thus wisdom becomes more expected. This progress may take
hundreds or thousands of years, but the seeds have been planted.
References
Berne, E. 1961. Transactional
analysis in psychotherapy: A systematic
individual and social psychiatry. New York: Grove.
Blatner, A. 2000. Foundations of
psychodrama: History, theory, and
practice. (4th ed.). New York: Springer.
Blatner, A., (& Allee Blatner). 1997. The Art of play: Helping adults to
reclaim imagination and spontaneity. New York:
Brunner/Routledge-Taylor
and Francis.
Blatner, A. (2003). Metaphors in psychotherapy. Available from http://www.blatner.com/adam/level2/metaphors.htm
Cohen, J., ed. 1999. Educating minds
and hearts: Social emotional learning and the passage into adolescence.
New
York: Teachers College Press.
Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and
society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
Fingarette, H. 2000. Self-deception.
2nd
ed. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Goleman, D., R. Boyatzis, and A. McKee. 2002. Primal leadership: Realizing the power of
emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
McLuhan, M. 1965. Understanding media.
New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Piaget, J. 1951. Play, dreams, and
imitation in childhood. New York: Norton.
Rheingold, H. 1988. They have a word
for it. Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher.
Wilber, K. 2000. Integral
psychology: Consciousness, spirit, psychology, therapy. Boston:
Shambhala.
Wilber, K. 2001. A theory of
everything: An integral vision for business, politics, science, and
spirituality. Boston: Shambhala.
---
Adam Blatner is a Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association,
a Fellow of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,
and retired from the faculty of the Department of Psychiatry at the
University of Louisville School of Medicine. Living north of Austin,
Texas, he teaches and writes, and has a special interest in topics
related to consciousness transformation. Website:
www.blatner.com/adam/ Email: adam@blatner.com
.